Paragraphs

Russia’s war in Ukraine has been roundly condemned in the West. NATO members have continued to supply Ukraine with weaponry while the EU, US and their allies have ensured that the Russian economy remains under the most extensive and intensive set of sanctions in history. Yet many leaders of countries in the global south have been far more hesitant to condemn Russian actions. Some have merely abstained in United Nations resolutions criticizing Russia, while others have remained neutral. This paper will endeavor to explain why the global south has such a different perspective from the global north on Russia’s war in Ukraine. I argue that this is a result of America’s withdrawal from the global south over the last two decades and Russia’s reemergence in many parts of the Middle East, Sub Saharan Africa, Latin America and Asia.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Slavic Review
Authors
Kathryn Stoner
Number
Issue 1
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
All News button
1
Subtitle

Does Attorney-Client Privilege Put Some People Above the Law? Lecturer Erik Jensen and Stanford Law and Policy Lab students Sarah Manny and Kyrylo Korol expose how attorney-client privilege can undermine the rule of law.

Date Label
Authors
Stanford Engineering Staff
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Political scientist Kathryn Stoner is the Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at Stanford and an authority on Russian/Ukrainian politics.

She says views on the current war depend on which side someone is on: Many Russians and their leader Vladimir Putin say Ukrainians are Russians and have been since the 10th century. Ukrainians strongly disagree, likening the two nations to the U.S. and Great Britain. How the present conflict is resolved has important implications for other former Soviet states and the future of the European Union, as Stoner tells host Russ Altman on this episode of Stanford Engineering’s The Future of Everything podcast.

Full transcript available from Stanford Engineering.

All News button
1
Subtitle

How the present conflict plays out has important implications for other former Soviet states and for the future of the E.U., says political scientist Kathryn Stoner.

Date Label
Authors
Michael Breger
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Indo-Pacific, the world’s fastest-growing region in the global economy, faces complex geopolitical and geo-economic risks. Amid Russia’s unrelenting war in Ukraine and its strengthening ties with a bellicose North Korea, China continues to exert its power through economic coercion and diplomatic pressures. Meanwhile, Asia's established and aspiring democracies must rise to the challenge of preventing further democratic decline and revitalizing their institutions. These trends dominated the agenda at the recent Nikkei Forum, The Liberal International Order in the Indo-Pacific.

Cohosted by Shorenstein APARC, the Keio Center for Strategy at the Keio University Global Research Institute, and Nikkei Inc., the forum was held on June 24, 2024, at Keio University and featured Freeman Spogli Institute (FSI) and Keio experts. Its first session, moderated by Akio Fujii, executive chair of the editorial board at Nikkei Inc., included panelists Oriana Skylar Mastro, FSI center fellow at APARC, and Michael McFaul, the director of FSI. They examined the geopolitical effects of the war in Ukraine, deterrence and provocation in Taiwan, and their implications for security in the Indo-Pacific. The second session, moderated by Nikkei commentator Hiroyuki Akita, included Gi-Wook Shin, the director of APARC and director of the Korea Program, and Kiyoteru Tsutsui, the deputy director of APARC and director of the Japan Program. Panelists considered the connectivity of European and Indo-Pacific security, the rise of authoritarianism and global populism, international partnerships, and various ongoing efforts to protect the liberal international order in the Indo-Pacific. The session recordings in English and Japanese are available on the Nikkei Global Events YouTube channel. 

Conflict, Deterrence, and Provocation

Opening the first session, McFaul underscored the broader geopolitical implications of the invasion of Ukraine. Emphasizing the significance of Russian President Vladimir Putin's recent visit to North Korea, he highlighted the intertwined nature of European and Asian security. McFaul argued against the notion that global security should solely focus on China, stressing that Putin's actions demonstrate a critical link between European security concerns and global stability.

McFaul offered a mixed assessment of the war in Ukraine. He praised the international community's response in providing military support and economic aid to Ukraine, stating, “I have been mostly impressed with how the liberal free world, including Japan, came together to provide weapons first and foremost, to provide economic assistance secondarily, and to put in place sanctions [agsint Russia].” Yet he also criticized delays in Western responses, attributing them partly to internal political dynamics, including actions taken during the Trump administration.

What I see, tragically, is the breakdown of the liberal International order.
Michael McFaul
Director of FSI

McFaul expressed concern that Russian defensive positions now hinder prospects for a breakthrough on the Ukrainian side, with future developments tied to the outcome of the next U.S. presidential election. He underscored the importance of democratic nations organizing against autocratic regimes, framing the conflict in Ukraine as a critical battleground for liberal democratic values amidst global power struggles. McFaul described that “what I see, tragically, is the breakdown of the liberal International order. We're going back to an earlier period where there was not one order, but two, and maybe many orders, and one of those divisions is between autocrats and democrats.”

Center Fellow Oriana Skylar Mastro addressed the moderator's query about Ukraine’s implications for East Asia by delving into the complexities of deterrence and provocation in relations with China. She highlighted three main concerns: the blurred distinction between actions that deter China versus those that provoke it, the conflicting priorities of reassuring allies versus deterring adversaries post-Ukraine, and the delicate balance between showcasing military capabilities and demonstrating resolve. Mastro argued that while military build-up might deter China, political gestures, such as enhancing Taiwan's international stature, could provoke tensions.

She emphasized the challenges in aligning U.S. and Japanese strategies, especially regarding Taiwan, where differing interpretations of deterrence and provocation persist. “Attempts to signal resolve can be much more provocative than attempts to demonstrate capabilities [...] It seems that the United States and Japan at least have to be on the same page about what is reassuring versus what deters China, what deters China versus what provokes China, and what is more important, capabilities or resolve,” she explained

Mastro stressed the importance of nuanced policy decisions considering how actions perceived as deterrence in one context might provoke, in another, thus impacting regional stability. “I prefer for the United States to speak softly and carry a big stick, meaning we have a lot of capability but we should stop talking about it so much,” she said. She underscored the U.S. and Japan must coordinate closely on strategic messaging to ensure a cohesive approach to managing China's responses and maintaining regional security.

FSI and APARC scholars meet with Yoshimasa Hayashi FSI and APARC scholars meet with Yoshimasa Hayashi.

During their visit to Tokyo, the Stanford delegation met with Japanese government officials, including Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi.

Michael McFaul gave an interview to the Japan Broadcasting Corporation's (NHK) prime-time news show News 7, which you can view here >

Manifold Pressures on Liberal Democracy

During the second panel, Gi-Wook Shin discussed the contemporary challenges facing liberal democracy, citing instances of foreign influence from authoritarian states like Russia and China. He began with a personal anecdote from Mongolia, where a friend running for parliament reported intimidation by authorities allegedly supported by Russia. Shin drew parallels to previous instances of interference, such as Russia's involvement in the 2016 U.S. election and China's actions in Taiwan and Korea.

In contrast to the American and British leadership against fascism and communism in the 1930s and 1940s, Shin described the current crisis in global leadership to safeguard liberal values. He questioned whether any country could now step up to combat rising authoritarianism, citing Modi’s India and alliances forming between leaders like Putin, Kim Jong-Un, and Xi Jinping. “I don't think I can say with confidence that the U.S. can defend liberal democracy, I don't see any leader in Europe either, and I don't see anyone in Asia,” he lamented.

He called for strategies to restore and strengthen global leadership in promoting and defending liberal democracy against mounting authoritarian challenges from China, Russia, and others.

Japanese democracy is functioning quite well. Apart from that, Japanese Society is peaceful, safe, and stable. Although the economic growth rate is low, people's discontent is not gushing out
Kiyoteru Tsutsui
Deputy Director of APARC

In his remarks, Kiyoteru Tsutsui addressed these global challenges to democracy and emphasized Japan's role in safeguarding it. Tsutsui noted Japan's relatively stable democratic environment compared to nations experiencing greater political divisions. Despite recent economic fluctuations in the country,, “Japanese democracy is functioning quite well,” he argued. “Apart from that, Japanese society is peaceful, safe, and stable. Although the economic growth rate is low, people's discontent is not gushing out and they can live quite a good life.”

Tsutsui emphasized Japan's economic and diplomatic contributions to promoting democracy, citing its trusted role in assisting Asian countries through the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JAICA). He suggested Japan could assert its influence not only through traditional democracy promotion but also by establishing standards in areas like infrastructure and public health. “If we look at the global rankings, Japan has quite a big influence.” He underscored the importance of Japan's discreet but impactful diplomacy in upholding democratic values globally, including its involvement in initiatives like the Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy, The Quad, and CPTPP. Through practical actions and international cooperation, he said, Japan  demonstrates its commitment to democratic values and counters global trends of democratic decline. Throughout the forum, the panelists agreed that the Indo-Pacific remains at the center of the global struggle between democracy and autocracy. They emphasized the need for collaborative action to bolster democratic institutions worldwide and urged nations to unite quickly to prevent further escalation of tensions in the region and beyond.

Nikkei newspaper report on the Nikkei Forum – July 3, 2024
Download pdf

Read More

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida arrives to address a joint meeting of Congress in the House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol on April 11, 2024 in Washington, DC.
Commentary

Kishida May Pay a Price, but Has Handled LDP Scandal Shrewdly

Moves by Japanese prime minister could have lasting impact on country's politics.
Kishida May Pay a Price, but Has Handled LDP Scandal Shrewdly
All News button
1
Subtitle

At the Nikkei Forum, Freeman Spogli Institute scholars Oriana Skylar Mastro, Michael McFaul, Gi-Wook Shin, and Kiyoteru Tsutsui considered the impacts of the war in Ukraine, strategies of deterrence in Taiwan, and the growing tension between liberal democracy and authoritarian populism.

Date Label
Authors
Katherine Viti
Kyrylo Korol
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Many of us go to law school interested in public policy as well as in law, but it is a rare opportunity when students get to do legal research, write a policy report—and present that report to decision-makers in Washington, D.C. For those of us enrolled in Policy Practicum: Regulating Legal Enablers of Russia’s War on Ukraine, our experience went beyond learning theory and skills. The research class provided a platform to support the fight for justice globally and to reiterate the importance of lawyers in safeguarding democracy. And for one of us, it was also the opportunity to aid his own country, Ukraine, and its people in an existential war and to ensure that the voices of people from afar are heard and considered.

As Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine dragged into its third year, we were part of a group of Stanford Law School students researching how U.S.-based policy solutions could contribute to Ukraine’s war effort. In the policy lab, Professor Erik Jensen led students through two quarters of work to develop a policy report on the problem of legal professionals helping to evade sanctions (lawyer-enablers) in the context of the war in Ukraine. The policy lab’s client was the International Working Group on Russian Sanctions at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, led by Professor Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia.

Read the full article in Stanford Lawyer.

All News button
1
Subtitle

Stanford Law School students research and advocate for stronger regulation of lawyer-enablers of Russian sanctions evasion, led by professor Erik Jensen.

Paragraphs

This paper investigates the critical role of private satellite constellations, particularly Starlink, in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. It delves into how these systems are employed for intelligence gathering, communications, and logistical support, emphasizing their strategic importance in modern warfare. The research contributes to the discourse on the militarization of space assets, providing a nuanced understanding of the intersections between technology, ethics, and warfare.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Conference Memos
Publication Date
Authors
Hayden Fite
Rebecca Wang
Mikhail Zinovyev
Sergey Clado
Luv Jawahrani
Paragraphs

Lawyers represent a significant threat to the integrity of the U.S. sanctions regime. This report analyzes that threat in the context of Russia’s aggressive war against Ukraine. Sanctions, particularly individual sanctions, are a central weapon in the United States’ national security arsenal. This report recommends that Congress, federal agencies, and state bar associations implement a comprehensive regulatory regime for lawyers engaging in certain transactional work to ensure U.S. lawyers are no longer enablers of sanctions evasion.

This report recommends amending the Banking Secrecy Act (BSA) to subject financial transactional work completed by lawyers to the same anti-money laundering and anti-sanctions evasion requirements to which banks are subject. Lawyers would be required to verify the true identity of their clients when completing financial transactions on their behalf and file reports with the government on suspicious client activity. This requirement would prevent oligarchs from gaming the U.S. anti-money laundering (AML) system by using lawyers instead of banks for these transactions. Congress must also fully fund the agencies that would implement this new law: the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), and the Department of Justice (DOJ). FinCEN must issue comprehensive rules clarifying lawyers’ obligations under the BSA, and OFAC must amend its regulations to plug a critical gap in the current sanctions implementation framework. Finally, state bar associations must require that lawyers be trained on their new obligations.

This report begins with a description of the problem: oligarchic wealth, how that wealth supports Putin’s regime, and how U.S. lawyers enable sanctions evasion (Part I). It then gives an overview of the current regulatory landscape (Part II). Next, it presents how six other countries regulate lawyers as potential enablers of sanctions evasion and other crimes, including money laundering (Part III). Finally, it proposes a comprehensive legislative and regulatory regime to solve the lawyers-as-enablers problem (Part IV).

About the Law and Policy Lab

Under the guidance of faculty advisers, Law and Policy Lab students counsel real-world clients in such areas as education, copyright and patent reform, governance and transparency in emerging economies, policing technologies, and energy and the environment. Policy labs address problems for real clients, using analytic approaches that supplement traditional legal analysis. The clients may be local, state, or federal public agencies or officials, or private non-profit entities such as NGOs and foundations. Typically, policy labs assist clients through empirical evidence that scopes a policy problem and assesses options and courses of action. The methods may include comparative case studies, population surveys, stakeholder interviews, experimental methods, program evaluation or big data science, and a mix of qualitative and quantitative analysis. Faculty and students may apply theoretical perspectives from cognitive and social psychology, decision theory, economics, organizational behavior, political science or other behavioral science disciplines.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Reports
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Stanford Law School Law and Policy Lab, 2023-24 Spring
Authors
Erik Jensen
Kyrylo Korol
Sarah Manney
Katherine Viti
Lexi Curnin
Bryce Tuttle
Nathaniel Quigley
Tengqin (Max) Han
Garrett Walker
Frishta Quigley
Danny Sharp
Gabriel Bernardes
Moira Lieto
Gretchen Knaut
Book Publisher
Policy Practicum: Regulating Professional Enablers of Russia’s War on Ukraine (Law 809M)
Authors
Montana Gray
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs


This article originally appeared in The Stanford Daily.

European Union (EU) High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell M.S. ’75 visited the Hoover Institution on Monday for an event hosted by the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI).

In a keynote speech followed by a conversation with the institute’s director and former ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, Borrell delved Europe’s crucial role and responsibilities in addressing ongoing war in Ukraine and Gaza, as well as geopolitical security and emerging technology more broadly.

Borrell emphasized the need for EU countries to collectively adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape and increase their strategic responsibility. He stressed the importance of European unity in the face of challenges posed by Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the ongoing Israel-Gaza war, noting that the security landscape has “dramatically changed.”

“Europe has to learn to speak the language of power,” Borrell said, emphasizing the need for Europe to increase its military capacities while utilizing all available tools to face global challenges.

Listen to Representative Borrell's full discussion with Michael McFaul below on a special episode of World Class podcast.

Follow the link for a transcript of "Strategic Responsibility in the EU, United States, and Beyond."

Regarding the Israel-Gaza war, Borrell called for a political process that would empower the Palestinian Authority and reach a solution for peace, describing the current state as “a stain on human consciousness.” He urged the international community to push for a ceasefire, secure the release of hostages, and ensure better access to humanitarian aid in the region.

“It is not a natural catastrophe what is happening in Gaza. It is not an earthquake, it is not a flood when you come and help people suffering the consequences. [It] is a manmade disaster, is a manmade catastrophe,” Borrell said.

Among the other global challenges Borrell called for Europe to address was the continent’s dependence on China for critical materials and technologies. He emphasized the importance of coordinating with the US to counter China’s growing influence in the global economic and political sphere.

“More coordination in front of China should be one of the most important things that the Europeans and the Americans should do in order to balance the challenges of this world,” Borrell said.

More broadly, Borrell spoke to the importance of coordination between the US and EU to work globally to protect “political freedom, economic prosperity, and social cohesion.”

Borrell acknowledged that the United States is a global leader in emerging technologies, particularly artificial intelligence, and stressed the importance of cooperation on trade and technological innovation. He expressed concern that regulatory hurdles may be hindering the EU’s ability to catch up with the U.S. in the technology sector and emphasized the significance of transatlantic collaboration in shaping the future of technology.

“I am happy to know that we are partners in building a responsible and human-centric technological innovation,” Borrell said.

The importance of partnership across countries was a throughline in Borrell’s speech, as he concluded with a reminder of the interconnectedness of global security and social well-being. “You cannot be secure at home if your neighbor is not eating dinner.”



Watch High Representative Borrell's full keynote remarks below. Video courtesy of the European Commission.

Read More

Dr. Salam Fayyad, former prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, in conversation with Larry Diamond, FSI's Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy, at an event hosted by CDDRL's Program on Arab Reform and Democracy.
News

Palestinian Statehood and the War in Gaza

Salam Fayyad, former prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, spoke about the quest for peace and Palestinian statehood during a conversation on the Palestinian people, the Gaza War, and the conflict’s implications for stability in the Middle East, hosted by CDDRL’s Program on Arab Reform and Democracy.
Palestinian Statehood and the War in Gaza
Michael McFaul listens to President Zuzana Čaputová speak during the Q&A portion of her fireside chat at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.
News

Slovak President Optimistic about Democracy, but Warns about Russian Misinformation

During a visit to the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Slovak President Zuzana Čaputová reminded the Stanford community that the stakes of the war in Ukraine are high and will impact democracies far beyond Eastern and Central Europe.
Slovak President Optimistic about Democracy, but Warns about Russian Misinformation
Will Dobson, book cover of "Defending Democracy in an Age of Sharp Power," and Chris Walker
News

How Can Democracies Defend Against the Sharp Power of Autocrats?

Christopher Walker, Vice President for Studies and Analysis at the National Endowment for Democracy, and Will Dobson, co-editor of the Journal of Democracy, discussed their new book, “Defending Democracy in an Age of Sharp Power” (Johns Hopkins University Press 2023).
How Can Democracies Defend Against the Sharp Power of Autocrats?
All News button
1
Subtitle

Borrell emphasized the need for EU countries to adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape and increase their strategic responsibility, whether in responding to Russian aggression in Ukraine, the crisis in Gaza, or competition with China.

-
Sergiy Leshchenko, 2024: A Decisive Year in Russia's War in Ukraine

In 2022, Russia initiated an unprovoked attack on Ukraine, marking the largest conflict in Europe since World War II. Despite initial gains, Putin was unable to change the political landscape in Kyiv, and approximately half of the territories initially seized by Russian forces were later reclaimed by Ukraine. However, the war is far from over. The war has also tested American leadership, particularly as China and France have expanded their international influence. The upcoming U.S. presidential election further escalates the uncertainty, as continued American support for Ukraine is critical. A Ukrainian victory is pivotal not only for regional stability but also for the security of American citizens.

ABOUT THE SPEAKER

Sergiy Leshchenko is formerly a journalist with Ukrainska Pravda and a member of the Ukrainian Parliament (2014-2019). He first rose to political prominence during Ukraine’s 2014 Maidan Revolution and has continued to serve in government and civil society since. He is an advisor to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s chief-of-staff and the initiator of the Working Group on Sanctions Against Russia, co-led by Michael McFaul. Mr. Leshchenko is an alumnus of the 2013 cohort of the Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program (now the Fisher Family Summer Fellows Program) at FSI’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University.

Kathryn Stoner
Kathryn Stoner

In-person: Philippines Conference Room (Encina Hall, 3rd floor, 616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford)
Online: Via Zoom

Sergiy Leshchenko Advisor to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's Chief of Staff
Seminars
Authors
Rachel Owens
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Is Ukraine too corrupt to be a part of the European Union? In a recent Rethinking European Development and Security (REDS) seminar talk co-hosted by CDDRL and The Europe Center, Maria Popova, McGill University Associate Professor of Political Science, assessed how serious the issue of Ukrainian corruption really is. While some observers have claimed that Ukraine’s corruption renders it unprepared for EU accession, Popova’s research suggests otherwise. Contrasting Ukraine to recent EU entrants — Bulgaria, Romania, and Croatia — she finds that corruption indices are not very helpful in drawing reliable conclusions.

In all four said countries, corruption is touted as the most salient issue, with strikingly similar scandals occurring across them. Over the last ten years, Ukraine has developed an extensive anti-corruption infrastructure, forming institutions for the prevention, investigation, and prosecution of corruption cases, as well as for asset recovery. These institutions have produced mixed results, and issues of political competition between institutions have tainted their wider reputation, with the National Agency for Prevention of Corruption receiving the most positive feedback. Innovative e-procurement systems like ProZorro have been internationally praised. Ukraine is unique in that its anti-corruption infrastructure came well before attempting EU accession. 

Bulgaria, on the other hand, established its anti-corruption agencies ten years after becoming an EU member. These institutions have since become politically compromised; so much so that anti-corruption reformists recently forced their abolition. 

In Romania, institutions were created around the time of accession and have been successful in holding corrupt oligarchs accountable. Similarly, Croatia’s anti-corruption reforms proceeded during accession negotiations.

Although the four countries adopted similar anti-corruption institutional reforms, today Ukraine tracks as significantly more corrupt than the EU members across measures of regime, public sector, executive, and political corruption, even though it is cleaner than Romania was when it started accession negotiations, more corrupt than Bulgaria was, and equally corrupt as Croatia at its start of negotiations. Why? Popova argued that the indices are fundamentally non-comparative and thus need to be taken with a grain of salt. The score for each country is determined by experts that focus exclusively on that country, who consider variation in corruption over time only. Moreover, the abstract conceptual definition of corruption is applied to their narrow case knowledge and experience and thus reflects local, rather than generalizable conceptualization. 

While index scores correlate with local perceptions, this, too, may just reflect a narrative on the ground. If the local narrative is that the country is highly corrupt, the population will likely perceive it to be, with no sense of its real magnitude. 

When analyzing Ukraine’s anti-corruption institutions, Popova finds that Ukraine is better prepared for EU accession than is widely assumed.

Read More

Will Dobson, book cover of "Defending Democracy in an Age of Sharp Power," and Chris Walker
News

How Can Democracies Defend Against the Sharp Power of Autocrats?

Christopher Walker, Vice President for Studies and Analysis at the National Endowment for Democracy, and Will Dobson, co-editor of the Journal of Democracy, discussed their new book, “Defending Democracy in an Age of Sharp Power” (Johns Hopkins University Press 2023).
How Can Democracies Defend Against the Sharp Power of Autocrats?
Eugene Finkel presents during a REDS Seminar co-hosted by The Europe Center and CDDRL on April 18, 2024.
News

The Historical Roots of Russia’s Quest to Dominate Ukraine

According to Eugene Finkel, the Kenneth H. Keller Associate Professor of International Affairs at Johns Hopkins University, Russia’s recurrent attacks against Ukraine can be traced to issues of identity and security.
The Historical Roots of Russia’s Quest to Dominate Ukraine
Beatriz Magaloni presents during a CDDRL research seminar on April 11, 2024.
News

Can Indigenous Political Autonomy Reduce Organized Crime? Insights from Mexico

Beatriz Magaloni, the Graham H. Stuart Professor of International Relations, presented her latest research during a CDDRL seminar talk.
Can Indigenous Political Autonomy Reduce Organized Crime? Insights from Mexico
Hero Image
All News button
1
Subtitle

While some observers have claimed that Ukraine’s corruption renders it unprepared for EU accession, Maria Popova’s research suggests otherwise.

Date Label
Subscribe to Ukraine